Advertisement

Acta Neurochirurgica

, Volume 160, Issue 3, pp 551–557 | Cite as

Procedural complications of endovascular treatment in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage treated at a single centre

  • Mikko Alanen
  • Liisa Pyysalo
  • Iiro Jalava
  • Oona Snicker
  • Juha-Pekka Pienimäki
  • Juha Öhman
  • Antti Ronkainen
Original Article - Vascular

Abstract

Background

We present a single-centre experience of procedural complications suffered by patients undergoing endovascular treatment for a ruptured saccular intracranial aneurysm at Tampere University Hospital, Finland, between 2000 and 2014.

Method

From 2000 to 2014, we treated 1,253 patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage, 491 of whom received endovascular treatment. Clinical data were collected retrospectively from the hospital’s aneurysm database. A procedural complication was defined as having occurred whenever there was a documented new event in the patient’s medical records or a note of a technical complication written by an interventionist after endovascular treatment. Procedural complications could be with or without clinical symptoms.

Results

Nearly 40% (491/1253) of the patients were treated with the endovascular method. Procedural complications occurred in 11.4% (56/491) of cases. The morbidity rate was 4.5% (22/491) and the mortality rate was 0.2% (1/491). Of the 56 complications, ischaemic complications occurred in 52% (29/56), haemorrhagic complications occurred in 27% (15/56) and technical complications occurred in 21% (12/56) of cases. In 61% (34/56) of the cases, the procedural complication did not cause any clinical symptoms.

Conclusions

The total risk for procedural complications leading to postoperative disability or death at our institute was 4.7%. The complication frequency is in accordance with previous reports. Endovascular treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms is a safe treatment method when patient selection is carefully performed.

Keywords

Subarachnoid haemorrhage Intracranial aneurysm Endovascular treatment Procedural complications Treatment Aneurysm 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Anne Simi, the study nurse, for her support in collecting the data. We would also like to thank Data Scientist Jarkko Penttinen for mastering the database.

Funding

No funding was received for this research.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organisation or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements) or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge, or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Ethical approval

No formal authorisation is needed from an ethics committee for this type of study.

Informed consent

This type of study does not require formal consent.

References

  1. 1.
    Anxionnat R, Tonnelet R, Derelle AL, Liao L, Barbier C, Bracard S (2015) Endovascular treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: indications, techniques and results. Diagn Interv Imaging 96:667–675CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brinjikji W, Lanzino G, Cloft HJ, Siddiqui AH, Boccardi E, Cekirge S, Fiorella D, Hanel R, Jabbour P, Levy E, Lopes D, Lylyk P, Szikora I, Kallmes DF (2016) Risk factors for ischemic complications following pipeline embolization device treatment of intracranial aneurysms: results from the IntrePED study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 37:1673–1678CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clajus C, Strasilla C, Fiebig T, Sychra V, Fiorella D, Klisch J (2016) Initial and mid-term results from 108 consecutive patients with cerebral aneurysms treated with the WEB device. J Neurointerv Surg.  https://doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012276
  4. 4.
    de Rooij NK, Linn FH, van der Plas JA, Algra A, Rinkel GJ (2007) Incidence of subarachnoid haemorrhage: a systematic review with emphasis on region, age, gender and time trends. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 78:1365–1372CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ding D (2015) Endovascular management of intracranial aneurysms: advances in stenting techniques and technology. J Cerebrovasc Endovasc Neurosurg 17:331–333CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Health Quality Ontario (2006) Coil embolization for intracranial aneurysms: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser 6:1–114Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Henkes H, Fischer S, Weber W, Miloslavski E, Felber S, Brew S, Kuehne D (2004) Endovascular coil occlusion of 1811 intracranial aneurysms: early angiographic and clinical results. Neurosurgery 54:268–280CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jabbour PM, Tjoumakaris SI, Rosenwasser RH (2009) Endovascular management of intracranial aneurysms. Neurosurg Clin N Am 20:383–398CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Linfante I, Mayich M, Sonig A, Fujimoto J, Siddiqui A, Dabus G (2016) Flow diversion with pipeline embolic device as treatment of subarachnoid hemorrhage secondary to blister aneurysms: dual-center experience and review of the literature. J Neurointerv Surg 9:29–33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lozier AP, Connolly ES Jr, Lavine SD, Solomon RA (2002) Guglielmi detachable coil embolization of posterior circulation aneurysms: a systematic review of the literature. Stroke 33:2509–2518CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Molyneux A, Kerr R, International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) Collaborative Group, Stratton I, Sandercock P, Clarke M, Shrimpton J, Holman R (2002) International subarachnoid aneurysm trial (ISAT) of neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling in 2143 patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a randomized trial. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 11:304–314CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nguyen TN, Raymond J, Guilbert F, Roy D, Bérubé MD, Mahmoud M, Weill A (2008) Association of endovascular therapy of very small ruptured aneurysms with higher rates of procedure-related rupture. J Neurosurg 108:1088–1092CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pierot L, Cognard C, Anxionnat R, Ricolfi F, CLARITY Investigators (2010) Ruptured intracranial aneurysms: factors affecting the rate and outcome of endovascular treatment complications in a series of 782 patients (CLARITY study). Radiology 256:916–923CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pyysalo LM, Keski-Nisula LH, Niskakangas TT, Kahara VJ, Ohman JE (2010) Long-term follow-up study of endovascularly treated intracranial aneurysms. Interv Neuroradiol 16:361–368CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ridwan S, Urbach H, Greschus S, von Hagen J, Esche J, Bostrom A (2016) Healthcare costs of spontaneous aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage for rehabilitation, home care and in-hospital treatment for the first year. World Neurosurg 97:495–500CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Spetzler RF, McDougall CG, Zabramski JM, Albuquerque FC, Hills NK, Russin JJ, Partovi S, Nakaji P, Wallace RC (2015) The barrow ruptured aneurysm trial: 6-year results. J Neurosurg 123:609–617CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Steiner T, Juvela S, Unterberg A, Jung C, Forsting M, Rinkel G, European Stroke Organization (2013) European stroke organization guidelines for the management of intracranial aneurysms and subarachnoid haemorrhage. Cerebrovasc Dis 35:93–112CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Taha MM, Nakahara I, Higashi T, Iwamuro Y, Iwaasa M, Watanabe Y, Tsunetoshi K, Munemitsu T (2006) Endovascular embolization vs surgical clipping in treatment of cerebral aneurysms: morbidity and mortality with short-term outcome. Surg Neurol 66:277–284 discussion 284CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    van Gijn J, Kerr RS, Rinkel GJ (2007) Subarachnoid haemorrhage. Lancet 369:306–318CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    van Rooij WJ, Sluzewski M, Beute GN, Nijssen PC (2006) Procedural complications of coiling of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: incidence and risk factors in a consecutive series of 681 patients. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 27:1498–1501PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    van Rooij WJ, Peluso JP, Bechan RS, Sluzewski M (2016) WEB treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 37:1679–1683CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wang F, Chen X, Wang Y, Bai P, Wang HZ, Sun T, Yu HL (2016) Stent-assisted coiling and balloon-assisted coiling in the management of intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review & meta-analysis. J Neurol Sci 364:160–166CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zubair Tahir M, Enam SA, Pervez Ali R, Bhatti A, ul Haq T (2009) Cost-effectiveness of clipping vs coiling of intracranial aneurysms after subarachnoid hemorrhage in a developing country—a prospective study. Surg Neurol 72:355–360CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tampere University HospitalTampereFinland

Personalised recommendations